Cpl.D:2012: "Why should I vote Republican?" We need to get rid of Obammer because deficit and big money and too much government!2013: "Looks like the deficit is getting smaller." OMG Obammer do everything wrong!

Good god, man. If Obama cured cancer and brokered world peace, they'd claim it was some sort of diabolical plot. You know... Obama should join the NRA. The conservative nuts would enter a permanent derp feedback loop. It would be an awesome spectacle. They'd be forced to double down, and double again, and again, and so on until they had so much derp that they'd collapse into a point of infinite stupidity and leave the universe forever.

pxsteel:Sergeant Grumbles: pxsteel: what do you not believe in my post

That all we need is just one more tax cut and we'll be drowning in jobs.

How is it a tax cut. We are currently getting 0% instead of the 10% we could be getting.

We've done this before. They'll take the 10% for all US operations and then use the money gained by the tax cuts to further offshore factories. You just stated exactly what the Bush tax cuts were supposed to do. Look what happened instead.

Trickle Down doesn't work. When you give the rich more money the rich just have more money.

pxsteel:WhyteRaven74: pxsteel: How is it a tax cut. We are currently getting 0% instead of the 10% we could be getting.

Why should we be doing them any favors? Why should we bend over backwards for them?

Because:

We want the jobsWe want the revenue

lower cost to operate is why they left in the first place

And they would still have lower operating costs if we taxed them at 0%. Unless we're willing to replicate third-world sweatshop conditions and environmental disasters in the US, we're never going to be able to beat the third world in a race to the bottom. We're going to have to figure out another solution.

Then enforce the existing tax code. And if need be get a bit tough, threatening their status as public companies would likely work well. And if it doesn't, oh well, the SEC can tear up their paperwork plenty fast.

One of the biggest consumer markets in the world we should be controlling our imports in out best interest like other countries for starters. Then go back to the previous tax rates before the Bush temporary cuts. And we should stop lighting fires where there is no need. Get some self confidence back and act like Americans and not like a couple of ferrel cats. Mic off......

pxsteel:Sergeant Grumbles: pxsteel: what do you not believe in my post

That all we need is just one more tax cut and we'll be drowning in jobs.

How is it a tax cut. We are currently getting 0% instead of the 10% we could be getting.

I know you're getting some flak for your suggestion.but at least you have proposed a solution to bring jobs back home.

as mentioned we cannot compete with 3rd world ease of exploitation. I think some healthy tariffs are in order at the very least, after that, we wait until gas prices soar to new heights making transport such a burden in addition to tariffs that anyone living & selling goods & services in the U.S.A. either cut their CEO pay or start making in the U.S.A. again.

HeartBurnKid:pxsteel: WhyteRaven74: pxsteel: How is it a tax cut. We are currently getting 0% instead of the 10% we could be getting.

Why should we be doing them any favors? Why should we bend over backwards for them?

Because:

We want the jobsWe want the revenue

lower cost to operate is why they left in the first place

And they would still have lower operating costs if we taxed them at 0%. Unless we're willing to replicate third-world sweatshop conditions and environmental disasters in the US, we're never going to be able to beat the third world in a race to the bottom. We're going to have to figure out another solution.

Actually the CEO of HP laid it out very nicely. The employee costs in China have been rising in the last 7 years and the cost of freight has skyrocketed to the point that it would actually be cheaper to produce in the US than China or Malaysia if the taxes were in the 10% range

Here's the thing, if they start producing in the US they'll have more stuff to write off on their taxes. Also anyone who says "It would be cheaper to do it here, but I won't do it until you cut taxes", is not a business person but just a shyster. And should be treated as such.

Isitoveryet:pxsteel: Sergeant Grumbles: pxsteel: what do you not believe in my post

That all we need is just one more tax cut and we'll be drowning in jobs.

How is it a tax cut. We are currently getting 0% instead of the 10% we could be getting.

I know you're getting some flak for your suggestion.but at least you have proposed a solution to bring jobs back home.

as mentioned we cannot compete with 3rd world ease of exploitation. I think some healthy tariffs are in order at the very least, after that, we wait until gas prices soar to new heights making transport such a burden in addition to tariffs that anyone living & selling goods & services in the U.S.A. either cut their CEO pay or start making in the U.S.A. again.

I think if it were to be done, tariffs would be the way. The combination of paying workers $50 a week, plus the lack of environmental and safety regulations means there's huge incentive to produce offshore.

pxsteel:Actually the CEO of HP laid it out very nicely. The employee costs in China have been rising in the last 7 years and the cost of freight has skyrocketed to the point that it would actually be cheaper to produce in the US than China or Malaysia if the taxes were in the 10% range

Oh.

The government does not march to the beat of HP's CEO's drum.

You know who else could use a 10% tax rate? Everyone who earns under 50k/year in salary. Where's our big, gigantic giveaway sloppy-kiss handout stimulative tax rate cut? Of the ~1/3 of the economy that is "consumer spending", we're responsible for 60-70% of it. So why not give those billions to millions, and tell the Fortune 500 to go buy off some other government?

pxsteel:Actually the CEO of HP laid it out very nicely. The employee costs in China have been rising in the last 7 years and the cost of freight has skyrocketed to the point that it would actually be cheaper to produce in the US than China or Malaysia if the taxes were in the 10% range

So why don't we just use protective tariffs? If you're going to outsource jobs, then you're going to pay the unemployment checks of the people you laid off when you moved those jobs overseas.

America is supposed to be for the people, not for the businesses. You're proposing what is good for businesses first, but promoting it as if the side effect of "creating jobs" were the main reason for your proposal.

Start focusing first on what is good for the people, and maybe look at what is good for business as the beneficial side effect.

ox45tallboy:So why don't we just use protective tariffs? If you're going to outsource jobs, then you're going to pay the unemployment checks of the people you laid off when you moved those jobs overseas.

That.

And the more the country exploits workers and wrecks the planet, the higher the tariff.

rustypouch:Isitoveryet: pxsteel: Sergeant Grumbles: pxsteel: what do you not believe in my post

That all we need is just one more tax cut and we'll be drowning in jobs.

How is it a tax cut. We are currently getting 0% instead of the 10% we could be getting.

I know you're getting some flak for your suggestion.but at least you have proposed a solution to bring jobs back home.

as mentioned we cannot compete with 3rd world ease of exploitation. I think some healthy tariffs are in order at the very least, after that, we wait until gas prices soar to new heights making transport such a burden in addition to tariffs that anyone living & selling goods & services in the U.S.A. either cut their CEO pay or start making in the U.S.A. again.

I think if it were to be done, tariffs would be the way. The combination of paying workers $50 a week, plus the lack of environmental and safety regulations means there's huge incentive to produce offshore.

tariffs would cause either higher prices or shortage of product on the shelves. We need to compete in the world economy and we have been doing a pretty pi$$ poor job of it for a while now.

How about we stipulate that you only get the 10% on what you actually produce in the US?

ox45tallboy:pxsteel: tariffs would cause either higher prices or shortage of product on the shelves. We need to compete in the world economy and we have been doing a pretty pi$$ poor job of it for a while now.

Whoa, now, wait a second.

I'm not talking about taxing stuff we ship to other countries, just the stuff we import through companies that shuttered US operations to move manufacturing overseas.

How exactly does that keep us from competing in the world economy, especially when it means we will definitely be manufacturing more stuff here? Seems like the opposite should happen.

Do you think China will not try and protect itself. If we put tariffs on stuff built there they will respond with their own tariffs. This has been tried before and it has backfired almost every time.

ox45tallboy:America is supposed to be for the people, not for the businesses. You're proposing what is good for businesses first, but promoting it as if the side effect of "creating jobs" were the main reason for your proposal.

pxsteel:rustypouch: Isitoveryet: pxsteel: Sergeant Grumbles: pxsteel: what do you not believe in my post

That all we need is just one more tax cut and we'll be drowning in jobs.

How is it a tax cut. We are currently getting 0% instead of the 10% we could be getting.

I know you're getting some flak for your suggestion.but at least you have proposed a solution to bring jobs back home.

as mentioned we cannot compete with 3rd world ease of exploitation. I think some healthy tariffs are in order at the very least, after that, we wait until gas prices soar to new heights making transport such a burden in addition to tariffs that anyone living & selling goods & services in the U.S.A. either cut their CEO pay or start making in the U.S.A. again.

I think if it were to be done, tariffs would be the way. The combination of paying workers $50 a week, plus the lack of environmental and safety regulations means there's huge incentive to produce offshore.

tariffs would cause either higher prices or shortage of product on the shelves. We need to compete in the world economy and we have been doing a pretty pi$$ poor job of it for a while now.

How about we stipulate that you only get the 10% on what you actually produce in the US?

Yeah, the tariffs are probably a poor solution. But as long as overseas costs are so cheap, and regulations so lax, there's no incentive for companies to produce domestically.

pxsteel:ox45tallboy: pxsteel: tariffs would cause either higher prices or shortage of product on the shelves. We need to compete in the world economy and we have been doing a pretty pi$$ poor job of it for a while now.

Whoa, now, wait a second.

I'm not talking about taxing stuff we ship to other countries, just the stuff we import through companies that shuttered US operations to move manufacturing overseas.

How exactly does that keep us from competing in the world economy, especially when it means we will definitely be manufacturing more stuff here? Seems like the opposite should happen.

Do you think China will not try and protect itself. If we put tariffs on stuff built there they will respond with their own tariffs. This has been tried before and it has backfired almost every time.

And our stores might have to pay $4 for a pair of $120 shoes (that they'll likely shred and toss out), instead of $3!

sendtodave:ox45tallboy: America is supposed to be for the people, not for the businesses. You're proposing what is good for businesses first, but promoting it as if the side effect of "creating jobs" were the main reason for your proposal.

pxsteel:Do you think China will not try and protect itself. If we put tariffs on stuff built there they will respond with their own tariffs. This has been tried before and it has backfired almost every time.

Yes, and do you really think they'll want to ruin our economy when they're holding so much of our debt?

We could print the $1 trillion and send it right over, and their manufacturing would all of a sudden be worthless when we devalue our currency that much. They wouldn't be able to compete with our internal manufacturing for the products we buy here.

The reason we don't do this right now is because it would collapse their economy, and we don't have the manufacturing capacity at the moment to fill our own needs.

Thing is, the threat of a protective tariff will keep the manufacturers from moving overseas to begin with, so countries like China won't ever have the bargaining chip.

pxsteel:Do you think China will not try and protect itself. If we put tariffs on stuff built there they will respond with their own tariffs. This has been tried before and it has backfired almost every time.

the idea that any country would risk a trade war with the US right now is ridiculous.

The rest of the world is projected to enter, or stay in recession, for at least another year; central banks are falling over themselves, trying to stay competetive - japan, korea, australia, the ECB: all cutting rates, or printing money; meanwhile the chinese print BARELY (and questionably) positive GDP, and CPI in the face of reduced demand from every other country in the world except the US.

if there were any time to start redefining the terms of trade with the US, it would be now.

pxsteel:ox45tallboy: pxsteel: tariffs would cause either higher prices or shortage of product on the shelves. We need to compete in the world economy and we have been doing a pretty pi$$ poor job of it for a while now.

Whoa, now, wait a second.

I'm not talking about taxing stuff we ship to other countries, just the stuff we import through companies that shuttered US operations to move manufacturing overseas.

How exactly does that keep us from competing in the world economy, especially when it means we will definitely be manufacturing more stuff here? Seems like the opposite should happen.

Do you think China will not try and protect itself. If we put tariffs on stuff built there they will respond with their own tariffs. This has been tried before and it has backfired almost every time.

And if they do? They export to us far more than they import from us; them putting a tariff on us wouldn't hurt us much.

MayoSlather:un4gvn666: Tommy Moo: Unemployment is high because there are too many people.

LOL

Actually, he's not technically wrong. Due to gains in production we are more than flush with supply at the current rate of employment, and as technology/automation increases the job market will require fewer and fewer people to meet demand. As it stands now, outside of construction, most industries could increase demand significantly without hiring any additional people.

Thank you. Jesus Christ am I sick of people mocking me. About 5% of the population gets this simple concept. As automation increases productivity per person, we can either increase unemployment, decrease the number of workers, or decrease the number of hours in a work week. There is no fourth choice. One of those will happen. Making up nonsense work for people to do is the same as increasing unemployment. Every person working a Keynesian job is on welfare, except that it's worse than welfare, because it disguises the unemployment and allows people to imagine that there is no underlying problem that needs to be addressed.

We are governed by retarded people. Just accept that fact, for now. There is no amount of sh*t Congress can't screw up. Just be thankful the economy is resilient despite the best efforts of our dear leaders to screw it up eight ways from Sunday.

Don't watch cable news. Stay away from the opinion pages. There's nothing to see here but a gigantic sh*tshow. It's embarrassing and it will depress you.

Ignore it. Sounds economics and budgeting have been thrown right out the f*cking window and will never be heard from again until Congress grows the f*ck up and stops using that body as a live-version of FreeRepublic.com.

Tommy Moo:Thank you. Jesus Christ am I sick of people mocking me. About 5% of the population gets this simple concept. As automation increases productivity per person, we can either increase unemployment, decrease the number of workers, or decrease the number of hours in a work week.

what about increasing our demand for productivity per person?obviously we've automated away entire industries, but at the same time we've created entirely new industries that we can't automate yet.

If we create increased productivity per-person in one area, and offset it by creating a demand for increased productivity per-person in another area, haven't we created a 4th option that keeps things in balance? seems to me this is what's been happening forever.

asdfbeau:If we create increased productivity per-person in one area, and offset it by creating a demand for increased productivity per-person in another area, haven't we created a 4th option that keeps things in balance? seems to me this is what's been happening forever.

Something like vastly increasing medical services so that everybody can have access to them?

Silly people. The government is not going to tell you what the "actual" inflation rate is! You can not print money to pay debts! It becomes worthless. Look at Zimbabwe and if you don't like that look at Germany in the 20's and 30's. Printing money to pay out of control debt makes money worthless.

I am Canadian and I am stuck in this mess with you so just understand that you are not immune from financial collapse and it is coming. I am not a tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy guy but there is no way in practical terms that you can ever even come close to paying down your debt to something manageable. It is over. Done. You are paying ZERO interest for the money you currently borrow. Up to .25% in certain circumstances. The day interest rates even hit 2.5% you are done. You can't pay that. Not now. You owe too much.

The entire economic system of the WORLD will have to change to make things OK. I am not sure what that will mean but it will not be the US dollar being the reserve currency of the Earth. It will be something different. Perhaps the SDR but I hope not.

If 100% of Americans paid 100% of their income for 3 years for taxes their government would still be in debt that is bad. Very bad. What happens next? History will tell us eventually.... We get to live through it and see if what history tells us is right.

asdfbeau:Tommy Moo: Thank you. Jesus Christ am I sick of people mocking me. About 5% of the population gets this simple concept. As automation increases productivity per person, we can either increase unemployment, decrease the number of workers, or decrease the number of hours in a work week.

what about increasing our demand for productivity per person?obviously we've automated away entire industries, but at the same time we've created entirely new industries that we can't automate yet.

If we create increased productivity per-person in one area, and offset it by creating a demand for increased productivity per-person in another area, haven't we created a 4th option that keeps things in balance? seems to me this is what's been happening forever.

Increasing demand for productivity? Wtf are you talking about?

Automating new industry employs a few engineers temporarily, and most always replaces an existing need within an economy, usually more efficiently.